Realistically, I’m unlikely to suffer a rush of blood to the wallet sufficient to convince me to splash out, but you never know… 😀

Besides, I’m curious… So is anybody in the know regarding failure rates, etc?

WHenever I read about it, my first thought is that 18 gears is too many. Lose 7 or 8, making it xx1 equivalent the range and steps, and losing lots of weight,and it just might be a goer.

WHenever I read about it, my first thought is that 18 gears is too many. Lose 7 or 8, making it xx1 equivalent the range and steps, and losing lots of weight,and it just might be a goer.

It’s not really though, most gearboxes work with soem sort of overdrive type gear, so it’s actualy a 9 speed gearbox, that weighs as much as a 10speed (theres one more gear), but has 18 ratio’s. And I’m hypothesising, but I bet they worked out the width needed to reliably make one gear (too narrow = quicker wearing/fragile), then filled the space between the cranks as a lot of the weight is propbably in the caseing/bearings/shafts which would be common regardless of the number of gears. So in dropping from 2×9 to 2×6 they’d not save 30% of the weight, probably not much at all.

I too would like to know about reliability of the system.

thisisnotaspoon – Member
WHenever I read about it, my first thought is that 18 gears is too many. Lose 7 or 8, making it xx1 equivalent the range and steps, and losing lots of weight,and it just might be a goer.
It’s not really though, most gearboxes work with soem sort of overdrive type gear, so it’s actualy a 9 speed gearbox, that weighs as much as a 10speed (theres one more gear), but has 18 ratio’s. And I’m hypothesising, but I bet they worked out the width needed to reliably make one gear (too narrow = quicker wearing/fragile), then filled the space between the cranks as a lot of the weight is propbably in the caseing/bearings/shafts which would be common regardless of the number of gears. So in dropping from 2×9 to 2×6 they’d not save 30% of the weight, probably not much at all.

It’s a 3×6 internally – I reckon making it 2×4 would save a fair old chunk – the cogs themselves are heavy and thick compared to the casing – and I’m guessing they’re steel, while axles and casings can be aluminium. I think you could shave a lot of weight – the gearbox weighs six pounds accoring to the article that pic comes from.

Gear range quoted at 636% compared to 420% for XX1

If you want a 7, 8 or 9 speed box have a look at Effigear

did you have something to say Loco? You seem to have been fairly vocal about their failures

Isn’t the main point about the lowly chain that it’s efficient?

Isn’t the main point about the lowly chain that it’s efficient?

When clean, yes. When covered in mud, less so*. I certainly notice no reduction in drive efficiency over a derailleur system when riding my Rohloff-equipped bike. In theory, the spur-gear design of the pinion should be measurably (but probably not detectably by the rider) more efficient than the epicyclic design of an IHG, but who knows? It should also be stronger than an equivalent epicyclic, but it would have to be as it’s being pedalled directly (with no step-up between chairing and sprocket to reduce the torque load).

So, nobody knows of any reliability figures, then? Depending on sale volumes, that’s probably a good sign. I’m sure we’d get to hear about any major issues fairly quickly in such a high value component! 😉

*mostly, though, I hate the constant cleaning a derailleur needs, and grinding noises whenever you shift under load. For me, an internal gear arrangement is all about low-maintenance, reliable, fuss free shifting. YMMV.

There’s a couple of people here who have had them for about a year or so, it would be great to get their opinions…

Opinions on the pinions, haha

OP opinions on the Pinions for the minions….

No feedback on the Nicoli Pinion bike yet though…

When you’ve spent that much money on a bike, are you going to admit any problems before you’ve sold it…? 🙂